BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Insolvency Service Performance Targets

Jennifer Willott: I have set performance targets for the Insolvency Service for the coming financial year, 2014-15.
	In recent years there has been a significant fall in the number of new insolvency cases dealt with by the official receiver, from 78,000 cases in 2009-10 to a level of around 27,000 in 2013-14, with the expectation that this will fall further in 2014-15. The number of redundancy claims handled by the Insolvency Service has also dropped from a peak of 117,000 to 75,000 in the current year.
	The Insolvency Service has reduced its cost base significantly to reflect reducing demand, including reducing its work force from 3,200 people to fewer than 1,900 and reducing the number of offices from 36 to 32. Such reductions will continue in 2014-15 as the agency continues to respond to a declining level of work.
	In 2014-15 an important priority for the Insolvency Service will be to maintain its current high level of customer service during this period of major change. I have set targets at a level which reflects the challenges the agency continues to face.
	The Insolvency Service annual plan 2014-15 will be available from 2 April 2014 at: http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/About-us. This plan builds on achievements to date and the direction of travel agreed in 2012. It continues the agency’s focus on actions that support its long-term resilience: an enhanced profile and external relationships, an improved funding model, better delivery tools and investment in people capability.
	
		
			 Insolvency Service Published Targets 2013-14 2013-14 2014-15 
			   Target Forecast Outturn Target 
			 Value for Public Money Deliver against agreed budget, with sound financial management and robust governance  On target Achieve 
			 Customer/Stakeholder Satisfaction Customer satisfaction sustained in upper quartile of comparable public bodies (survey) 90% 96% 90% 
			 Confidence in enforcement activity (survey) >66% 69% 69% 
			 Delivery of projects to enhance the insolvency regime and to improve customer experience (% of milestones achieved to time)  On target 80% 
			 Operational Effectiveness % of reports issued to creditors within eight weeks bankruptcy/company cases 92% - 85% 97% - 92% 92% - 85% 
			 % of disqualification cases in which proceedings are instigated under 23 months 95% 99% 95% 
			 % of bankruptcy restrictions authorised within 11 months of insolvency 80% 92% 80% 
			 Action redundancy payment claims within three weeks to six weeks 80% - 92% 86% - 97% 80% - 92%

TREASURY

Balance of Competences: Economic and Monetary Policy

Nicky Morgan: HM Treasury today publishes a call for evidence as part of the fourth semester of the Government’s review of the balance of competences, which is looking at what the EU does and how it affects the UK.
	The call for evidence looks at the balance of competence between the EU and the UK on economic and monetary policy. The document explains the historical development and legal background to the EU’s competence in this area and asks a number of questions about how the EU’s competence works in practice.
	HM Treasury is seeking evidence from a range of stakeholders who have an interest or experience in these areas, including individuals, think-tanks, Parliament, academia and institutions.
	The public call for evidence for this report will run from 27 March 2014 until 4 July 2014. The final report on the current balance of competence for economic and monetary policy and what this means for the national interest will be published by the end of 2014.
	Copies of the document have been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses and it is available online on the gov.uk website.

Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Act

Sajid Javid: The Government are today publishing the review of the Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Act 2008. As set out in the legislation, HM Treasury is required to undertake a review and to lay this before Parliament within three years from the date when a reclaim fund is first authorised.
	A copy of the review published today is available from the Library of the House and on the HM Treasury website.

Royal Mint Advisory Committee

Nicky Morgan: On 27 March 2012, my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Chloe Smith), the then Economic Secretary, announced to Parliament, through a written ministerial statement, Official Report, column 107WS, the commencement of a triennial review for the Royal Mint advisory committee on the design of coins, medals, seals and decorations.
	I am now pleased to announce the completion of the review.
	The advisory committee was established in 1922 with the personal approval of King George V. It exists to raise the standard of numismatic and medallic art in Britain and is expected to ensure that designs meet high standards of art, decency and good taste. Its purpose is to advise Government Departments, and ultimately the Queen, on matters of design with respect to coins, medals, seals and decorations. The eight members and the chair of the committee receive no payment for serving, but may claim reasonable expenses incurred in attending meetings, which are funded by the Royal Mint Museum. Expenses, if claimed, are paid by the Royal Mint.
	The triennial review was conducted in accordance with Government guidance for reviewing NDPBs.
	The review concluded that there continues to be a Government demand for heraldic, typographic, numismatic, technical and design advice. Having considered the delivery option alternatives, the review recognises the services delivered by the committee remain necessary to the business of the Department and ensures the quality of the themes and designs of UK coinage and official medals. Any alternative delivery route would incur a greater cost in both resource and financial terms. As such, the recommendation is to retain the advisory committee in its current form. However, while considering the governance of the committee the review recommends that the committee should make minor adjustments to current control and governance practices to improve the transparency of this small but important function.
	Copies of the report of the review will be placed today in the Libraries of both Houses.

DEFENCE

Iraq Fatality Investigations

Philip Hammond: I wish to inform the House of the progress that my Department has made in establishing a process by which a small number of fatalities of Iraqi nationals arising from UK operations in Iraq, where the deceased person was in the custody of or under the control of UK forces, can be subjected to an examination akin to a coronial inquest.
	This step has been prompted by the High Court’s decision in the Ali Zaki Mousa (No 2) judgment. In that judgment the court held that the arrangements set up for criminal investigations by the Iraq historic
	investigations team and the Royal Navy police acting under the Armed Forces Act 2006 are sufficiently independent to meet the requirements of article 2 of the European convention on human rights. But the court also held that, in a number of cases in which a prosecution did not result, a public procedure (similar to a coroner’s inquest) would also be needed so as to involve the public and the families of the deceased to the extent necessary to discharge fully the UK’s investigative obligations under article 2.
	The High Court indicated that this requirement could be met by holding
	“inquisitorial inquiries modelled on coronial inquests”.
	I have agreed to do so in up to 11 cases; the precise number will depend on the outcome of the Iraq historic allegations team’s investigations into the allegations and any resulting trials.
	I am pleased to announce that Sir George Newman, who retired from the High Court bench in 2007, has consented to chair the first two investigations. Sir George’s wide experience will be invaluable and I am grateful to him for taking on this important role.
	Sir George will investigate the death of Mr Naheem Abdullah as a result of injuries sustained at a road block in Maysan province on 11 May 2003, and the death of Mr Hassan Said as the result of gunshot wounds sustained on 2 August 2003. In both of these cases, the UK service personnel accused were acquitted after early termination of their trials. As a result of the early termination of the trials, resulting in evidence not being publicly presented, an inquisitorial inquiry is needed to meet the requirement for public and family access.
	Sir George has been directed not to consider issues of individual or collective culpability, and no prosecutions will result from his examination of these cases. These fatality investigations will serve a similar purpose to a coronial inquest by providing the families of the deceased and the wider public with the fullest possible information as to how the deceased died. Sir George will shortly publish fuller details of his remit and of the procedures that he will adopt.
	Sir George will, of course, receive the full support of the Ministry of Defence. He will produce a report setting out his findings and recommendations, and I will arrange for this to be published at the earliest opportunity.

Service Complaints Commissioner's Annual Report

Anna Soubry: I am pleased to lay before Parliament today the Service Complaints Commissioner’s sixth annual report on the fairness, effectiveness and efficiency of the service complaints system.
	I would like to thank the commissioner for her latest report, and for the outstanding contribution she has made in improving the service complaints process during her six years in post. More recently, her involvement in the work to draw up the proposals announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 13 March, Official Report, column 34WS, has been pivotal.
	The report recognises the progress made by the services in 2013, including the introduction of a new monitoring and reporting process to identify and mitigate undue delay in the system. It also raises issues of concern, in particular the apparent increase in bullying and harassment complaints within the Army. I will respond formally to the commissioner once the MOD has considered fully the findings of the report and the recommendations made.
	I can also inform the House that I have proposed, and Dr Atkins has accepted, that she should continue in office beyond her currently scheduled leaving date of the end of June. There are two reasons for this. First, it is now clear that the proposals announced on 13 March, including the creation of a service complaints ombudsman, will transform the role of the commissioner. Dr Atkins’ successor will, subject to Parliament approving the necessary legislation, need the right skills and experience to deliver that vision. I have therefore decided to restart the recruitment process, which means that it will not be possible to appoint a new commissioner by the end of June. Secondly, it will be important for the success of the proposed changes that we continue to draw on the considerable expertise and experience which Dr Atkins brings to this area, as plans are worked up in more detail over the coming months. I am grateful to her for her willingness to remain in post, to work in partnership to establish the role of the service complaints ombudsman on a sound and secure footing.

Special Risk Nuclear Indemnity

Andrew Murrison: It is normal practice when a Government Department proposes to undertake a contingent liability of £300,000 and above for which there is no specific statutory authority for the Department concerned to present to Parliament a minute giving particulars of the liability created and explaining the circumstances; and to refrain from incurring the liability until 14 parliamentary sitting days after the issue of the minute, except in cases of special urgency.
	Subject to no objections being received, I intend to authorise the proposal to undertake contingent liability for nuclear indemnity, after the usual 14 parliamentary sitting days. I have today, in accordance with the usual parliamentary procedures, laid a departmental minute on the proposal.
	The Treasury has approved that, where the financial impact of an event would make the contract untenable due to the nature of work being undertaken, the contractor may be relieved of their liability. Although the contractor is not working directly with nuclear, there is a low risk that their activities may cause an incident to occur. If, during the period of 14 parliamentary sitting days beginning on the date on which this minute was laid before the House of Commons, a Member signifies an objection by giving notice of a parliamentary question or a motion relating to the minute, or by otherwise raising the matter in the House, final approval of the proposal will be withheld pending an examination of the objection.

Baha Mousa Report

Mark Francois: I would like to update the House on the progress that the Government have made in implementing the
	recommendations made in the report of the Baha Mousa inquiry, chaired by the right hon. Sir William Gage, which was published on 8 September 2011.
	What happened to Baha Mousa was shameful, and undermined the excellent work of so many others. In his report, the chairman made 73 recommendations. In his statement to Parliament that day, Official Report, column 571, the then Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox), accepted all recommendations in principle with one exception relating to tactical questioning.
	I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Defence has now taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report. Many of them proposed amendments to departmental policy, standard operating procedures and oversight, while others focused on training; all personnel who undertake detainee handling now have the skills and experience to manage them appropriately. By strengthening all aspects of the detainee handling process we have returned the rigour and discipline that is synonymous with the high standards rightly expected by our armed forces.
	As envisaged in recommendation 44 of the inquiry’s report, the Department has given careful consideration to the possibility of an independent inspection of the UK’s Afghan detention facilities by Her Majesty’s chief inspector of prisons. However, UK detention facilities in Afghanistan continue to be inspected by the Provost Marshal (Army) every six months, and annually by the Army Inspector; they are also visited regularly by the International Committee of the Red Cross to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law. On balance, we believe that this triple inspection regime is already fit for purpose and does not require further amendment.

EDUCATION

European Union (Balance of Competences)

Matthew Hancock: I wish to inform the House that, following my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs’ oral statement launching the review of the balance of competences in July 2012, Official Report, column 468, and, most recently, written ministerial statement on the progress of the review on 13 February 2014, Official Report, column 76WS, the Department for Education is publishing its call for evidence on education, vocational training and youth.
	The review of education, vocational training and youth is being jointly led by the Department for Education (DfE), Cabinet Office (CO) and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
	The call for evidence period will last 12 weeks, from 27 March 2014 to 30 June 2014, and officials will draw together the evidence and policy analysis into draft reports, which will go through a process of scrutiny which is due to take place by the end of 2014.
	As with previous semesters, this report will consult widely. The Departments will pursue an active engagement process, including Parliament and its committees, the devolved Administrations, and civil society in order to obtain evidence to contribute to our analysis of competences. Our EU partners and the EU institutions
	will also be invited to contribute evidence to the review. As the reviews are to be objective and evidence-based, we are encouraging a wide range of interested parties and individuals to contribute.
	DfE, CO and BIS will take a rigorous approach to the collection and analysis of evidence. The call for evidence document sets out the scope of the report and includes a series of broad questions on which contributors are asked to focus. The evidence received—subject to the provision of the Data Protection Act—will be published alongside the final report, which is due to be published by the end of 2014, and will be available on the Government website www.gov.uk
	The result of the consultation will be a comprehensive, thorough and detailed analysis-based report. It will aid our understanding of the nature of our EU membership and it will provide a constructive and serious contribution to the wider European debate about modernising and improving the EU. The reports will not produce specific policy recommendations.
	The calls for evidence documents will be published and available on the Government website: https://www. gov.uk/review-of-the-balance-of-competences

Education Services Grant

David Laws: I am announcing today the launch of a public consultation on savings to the education services grant (ESG) for 2015-16.
	Local authorities are responsible for providing the schools they maintain with services to support education, such as school improvement and education welfare services. Academies are responsible for the provision of these services for their pupils. The ESG was introduced in 2013-14 and has made the funding of education services simpler and more transparent.
	The 2013 spending round announced that the Government will reduce the education services grant by around £200 million in 2015-16 and committed the Department to consulting on the detail of how the reductions will be implemented through realising efficiencies and enabling local authorities to focus on their core role in relation to schools. The Department for Education is committed to helping local authorities and academies to achieve the required savings for 2015-16. Field work has been carried out to collect information about how the ESG is currently being used, and to identify examples of local authorities and academies that have already made savings on these services.
	The consultation will be available on the Government website, www.gov.uk

Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission

David Laws: Today I wish to inform the House of the publication of the Government’s response to the first annual report by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission.
	The independent Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission monitors the progress of the Government and others in improving social mobility and reducing
	child poverty in the United Kingdom. The commission plays a vital role in ensuring the Government make progress in both of these areas and we are grateful to them for their thorough and comprehensive report.
	We are committed to ending child poverty. We will support families into work, help families to increase their earnings, improve living standards by decreasing costs for low-income families, and prevent poor children becoming poor adults by raising their educational attainment.
	We are determined to break down the barriers to social mobility at all stages of a person’s life, from when they are born right through into adulthood, to ensure that everyone can fulfil their potential.
	We are tackling the root causes of poverty by giving people opportunities rather than trapping them in dependency.
	A copy of the Government’s response will be available later today at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications.

Historical Child Protection Investigations

Michael Gove: I wish to inform the House that the Department for Education has received information about Jimmy Savile relating to several children’s homes and schools in England, dating back to the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. This information was uncovered as part of the document review process undertaken by the Metropolitan Police Service on behalf of the Department of Health.
	Having reviewed the information I have decided that the Department for Education should pass the information to the appropriate organisations for further investigation. In most cases the work will be conducted by the relevant local authority; in others the relevant institution or a legacy organisation will take the lead.
	In order to ensure consistency of approach with the NHS Savile investigations, I am replicating the arrangements adopted by the Department of Health to quality assure the work. I have appointed Lucy Scott-Moncrieff to provide independent oversight and quality assurance of the process, undertaking a similar role to that of Kate Lampard in the NHS trust investigations. I have asked Lucy Scott-Moncrieff to ensure that investigating organisations take all practicable steps to establish what happened and why at the time of the incidents and any lessons there might be to inform current safeguarding practice in our schools and children’s homes.
	I will inform the House of the outcome of this work.
	Information has been provided to responsible organisations as set out in the table below:
	
		
			  Institution(s) Mentioned in the Information Investigating Body Area 
			 1 Children’s home (name unknown) Local authority Bournemouth 
			 2 Colletton Lodge Local authority Devon 
			 3 The Ride children’s home Local authority Hounslow 
			 4 Parklands children’s home Local authority Gloucestershire 
		
	
	
		
			 5 Sevenoaks School Sevenoaks School Board of Governors Kent 
			 6 Northways Residential School Beechcroft children’s home Local authority Leeds 
			    
			 7 Henshaw School for the Blind Henshaw Society for Blind People Leeds 
			 8 Notre Dame Grammar School Notre Dame Catholic College Board of Governors Leeds 
			 9 Care home (name unknown) Local authority London Borough of Islington 
			 10 Hollies care home Local authority London Borough of Southwark 
			 11 St Leonard’s children’s home Local authority London Borough of Tower Hamlets 
			 12 Sarah Laski home Broome House children’s home Children’s home (name unknown) Local authority Manchester 
			    
			    
			 13 Aspley Wood school Local authority Nottingham 
			 14 Bassetlaw school Local authority Nottinghamshire 
			 15 National Children’s Home, Penhurst Action for Children Oxfordshire 
			 16 Beach Holme children’s home Broomfield children’s home Local authority Surrey 
			    
			 17 Barnardo’s children’s home (name unknown) Barnardo’s Redbridge

Primary and 16-to-19 Assessment and Accountability

David Laws: I am today announcing the final elements of our schools accountability reform programme: reforms to primary and 16-to-19 accountability from 2016. This builds on our plans for secondary school accountability.
	Progress will now be the most important way in which we will hold schools and colleges to account. The new accountability system will be fairer, measuring the progress that students make while at school or college. This ensures that all students receive equal attention: we will measure the progress that all students make whatever their starting point. This will prevent the unfair focus on those at threshold borderlines.
	To help all parents and students to compare schools and colleges, we will require all schools and colleges to publish the key information for primary, secondary and 16-to-19 phases on their websites in a standard format. This information will clearly show the progress that students make, their attainment and how well they do in English and mathematics.
	Primary
	We are resetting the standard for success for primary schools. Expectations are currently too low (level 4c in English and mathematics). In 2012, fewer than half the
	pupils who had only just reached this expected standard went on to achieve five good GCSEs. Under the new system, we will expect schools to support at least 85% of their pupils to achieve a new higher standard (closer to the present 4b level). With the continued improvement in teaching, the sharper focus of the new curriculum and increased funding, results should rise.
	We have invested through the pupil premium so that schools can give disadvantaged pupils the help they need. With more than 1.1 million pupils from reception to year 6 currently benefiting, schools receive £953 for each primary-age pupil rising to £1,300 from April 2014.
	To judge schools’ progress more fairly, we will work with experts to introduce a new assessment taken during reception as the baseline. This will sit within teachers’ broader ongoing assessments of children’s development and progress throughout reception. The reception baseline will be used to assess schools’ progress for children who start reception in September 2016 and beyond. Schools that choose not to use an approved baseline assessment from 2016 will be judged on the 85% attainment standard alone.
	From September 2016, the early years foundation stage profile will no longer be compulsory. The early years foundation stage will continue to be statutory and the basis for Ofsted inspection of early year settings including children in a school nursery and reception classes, thereby ensuring children receive a broad education and are able to learn and thrive in school.
	I can also confirm today that the grammar, punctuation and spelling test will not form part of the primary floor standard in 2014.
	16-to-19
	Our changes to 16-to-19 accountability support the reforms we have already made to improve the quality of 16-to-19 education and training. The introduction of study programmes and traineeships last September, the reforms to A-levels and vocational qualifications and the emphasis on English and mathematics support our ambitions to make sure that students in this country can compete with the best in the world.
	We will introduce new, fairer minimum standards for 16-to-19 providers. Wherever data allow it we will use progress measures. This will apply to academic and applied general qualifications. Where the data are not robust enough, we will use a combined completion and attainment measure.
	We will introduce five headline measures of performance for all 16-to-19 providers to give a broader picture of educational outcomes than attainment alone. These headline measures include: progress measures; attainment measures; retention measures; English and mathematics progress measures for those who did not achieve good grades at age 16; and destination measures.
	Conclusion
	We believe that the single most important outcome for any school or college is to give as many students as possible the knowledge and skills to flourish in the later phases of education and life. The reforms that I have set out today set the framework for schools and colleges to meet this challenge: ensuring all children move on to secondary school ready to succeed and all 16-to-19 students can move into further or higher education or employment.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Afghanistan (Monthly Progress Report)

William Hague: I wish to inform the House that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, together with the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development, is today publishing the 35th progress report on developments in Afghanistan since November 2010.
	On 2 February, the presidential election campaign opened. Seven of 11 candidates formally launched their campaigns on the first day, with only one choosing to do so from outside Kabul. The remaining candidates began their campaigns in the following days.
	On 8 February, the UN reported a 14% rise in the number of civilians killed or injured in 2013. The report considered armed opposition groups responsible for the majority (74%) and Afghan and international forces for 11% of casualties in 2013. A total of 10% of casualties resulted from engagements between pro and anti-Government forces while the remaining 5% were unattributed.
	On 13 February, the Government of Afghanistan released 65 US captured detainees who the US believed to have committed serious crimes, including killing US soldiers, and against whom the US thought there was good evidence.
	On 27 February NATO Defence Ministers reaffirmed their commitment to support continued planning for a post-2014 training mission in Afghanistan. Defence Ministers also tasked NATO military authorities to assess the implications of delays to the future mission and to undertake planning for other contingencies, including a “zero option”, in light of the uncertainty of securing the necessary legal permissions for the mission.
	UK development support of £5.3 million was provided to improve public services in Helmand, Uruzgan and Bamyan provinces through DFID’s strengthening provincial administration and delivery (SPAD) programme. The funds help build capacity in local systems while ensuring the money is properly spent to help local authorities provide better public services to local people.
	I am placing the report in the Library of the House. It will also be published on the gov.uk website: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/afghanistan-progress-reports

Balance of Competences (Review)

William Hague: My written ministerial statement of 13 February 2014, Official Report, column 76 WS updated the House on progress with the review, on publication of the second set of reports. I wish to inform the House today of the launch of semester four of the review. This is the final semester in the review that I launched in July 2012 and, which will conclude by the end of the year.
	Calls for evidence for the seven reports in the fourth (and final) semester cover: economic and monetary policy; information rights; police and criminal justice; education; enlargement; voting, consular and statistics;
	and subsidiarity and proportionality. The call for evidence period for these reports will open from 27 March and close the week of 30 June 2014.
	The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has overall responsibility for the reports covering enlargement and subsidiarity and proportionality, and joint responsibility for the report on voting, consular and statistics. Lead Ministers for each of the other reports will be informing the House separately of the publication of their calls for evidence.
	The Enlargement report—will assess the balance of competences between the EU and the UK in the field of enlargement of the European Union, including the impact of enlargement on UK interests, the development and effectiveness of the EU enlargement process and lessons learned from previous enlargements, the role of the member states and EU Institutions in the process, the use of conditionality and of financial and technical assistance, and future challenges and opportunities that enlargement will bring.
	The Subsidiarity and Proportionality report—covers the concepts of subsidiarity and proportionality which are fundamental principles to the functioning of the EU. It will address how these are used and applied in practice across EU activity: whether the EU acts only when necessary, and whether action takes place at the lowest level possible, and that the means are proportionate to the end. The report also covers article 352 which provides the EU with the power to act to achieve any of the objectives laid down by in the EU treaties where no other treaty article so provides, including the use and impact of the procedural safeguard provisions on competence.
	The Voting, Consular and Statistics—review covers three policy strands each led by the relevant Department: Cabinet Office (voting), the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (consular) and the national statistician on behalf of the UK Statistics Authority (statistics). The voting strand seeks views on the balance of competences on subjects including how to vote and stand as a candidate at elections, the franchise and EU democratic engagement initiatives (such as the European citizens’ initiative). The consular strand will consider the EU’s limited competence in consular services, which extends to the co-ordination of efforts between member states and the requirement for member states to treat unrepresented EU citizens, in consular matters, in the same way as they would treat their own nationals. The statistics strand of the review looks at EU competence to require statistical reports, and how that impacts issues such as data collection, respondent burden and the level of demand for information at a time of resource pressure.
	The FCO, along with the Cabinet Office and Statistics Authority will take a rigorous approach to the collection and analysis of evidence. Each call for evidence sets out the scope of the reports and includes a series of broad questions on which contributors are asked to focus. The evidence received (subject to the provision of the Data Protection Act) will be published alongside the final report, which is due to be published by the end of 2014, and will be available on the Government website: www.gov.uk.
	It is important to encourage a wide range of interested parties to contribute to ensure objective and evidenced based reports. The FCO will therefore pursue an active engagement strategy, consulting widely across Parliament,
	the devolved Administrations, think-tanks, business and civil society in order to obtain evidence to inform our analysis. The EU institutions and our foreign partners will also be invited to contribute, as will members of the public. These final reports will also consider evidence submitted in previous semesters where relevant.
	The call for evidence documents are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses. They are also published and available on the Government website: https://www.gov.uk/review-of-the-balance-of-competences

Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights

Mark Simmonds: Tomorrow the UK takes on the chairmanship of the voluntary principles on security and human rights for one year. The voluntary principles provide guidance to extractive companies operating in fragile and conflict-affected areas, on effective risk management and on mitigating the risk that the security around their operations might contribute to human rights abuses or exacerbate conflict. The voluntary principles support our conflict prevention objectives, in line with the Government’s building stability overseas strategy, and help us to meet our commitment to supporting UK extractive companies do business overseas in complex and fragile environments. The voluntary principles also fall within the UK’s business and human rights action plan, as one way of helping companies to abide by their responsibility to respect human rights in line with the UN guiding principles on business and human rights.
	The voluntary principles initiative consists of eight Governments, 23 extractive companies and nine civil society organisations. It provides a space for discussion of security and human rights challenges in the extractive sector, and is a useful mechanism for sharing best practice and learning lessons.
	We have three priorities for our chairmanship. First, we want to expand Government membership, particularly Governments of fragile and conflict-affected countries, where it can be difficult for UK extractive companies to do business. The more Governments that join the voluntary principles, the easier it is for UK companies, operating in complex environments, to manage their human rights impact, which in turn reduces the risk of violence and conflict. We will encourage greater Government membership through lobbying at ministerial and official level, and supporting roundtables, workshops and other events to promote the voluntary principles and raise awareness of the initiative.
	Secondly, we will work to strengthen corporate implementation of the voluntary principles. We will seek to more effectively engage local communities on the voluntary principles, to ensure that their voices are heard on the issues which directly affect them. We will also support project work to strengthen implementation of the voluntary principles on the ground, for example human rights training for public security, and capacity building for both civil society and Governments to enable them to engage more effectively in voluntary principles dialogue with other stakeholders.
	Thirdly we want to strengthen the accountability and transparency of the initiative, to bring the voluntary principles more into line with the UN guiding principles
	on business and human rights. This will include efforts to encourage greater public reporting on implementation, and support for peer review initiatives to learn lessons and improve processes.
	We will work closely with other voluntary principles participants, and through our network of overseas missions, to deliver these objectives. Our chairmanship is an important opportunity for us to play a leading role in strengthening the initiative to ensure it remains a credible and effective mechanism for managing security and human rights risks in the extractive sector.

HEALTH

Next Steps for Nursery Milk (Government Response)

Daniel Poulter: Today I am publishing the response to: “Next Steps for Nursery Milk”—a public consultation on the future of the nursery milk scheme.
	The purpose of the consultation was to explore three different options for reforming the scheme: looking at where we can make it more efficient and improve its value for money, while ensuring that all children under five attending a child care setting for more than two hours a day continue to receive free milk.
	Of the options for changing the scheme, 53% of respondents ranked the direct supply option as their first preference compared to 39% for the price capping option. Only 16% preferred the e-voucher option.
	The nursery milk scheme has been running since the 1940s. The scheme currently funds free milk for around 1.5 million children under five years old in 55,000 child care settings throughout Great Britain. The Government remain fully committed to the nursery milk scheme, and to continuing to supply milk to children under five years old.
	In recent years, the prices claimed for milk purchased under the scheme have risen significantly, with a corresponding increase in the total cost of the scheme from £27 million in 2007-08 to £61 million in 2012-13. This trend looks likely to continue with costs potentially rising to £80 million by 2015-16. The main reason for the increasing costs of the scheme has resulted from some suppliers of nursery milk charging as much as 92p per pint of milk when the average shop price is 49p per pint.
	The direct supply option is the best way forward for the scheme as it provides best value for money to the taxpayer. Under direct supply, the scheme will be delivered with an estimated saving of £36 million per year, while providing only fresh milk to all eligible children in registered child care or early years settings.
	We will engage with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) while developing the new scheme and encourage SMEs to consider bidding as part of a consortia of potential suppliers and/or as sub-contractors working with larger organisations to supply and deliver nursery milk.
	“Next Steps for Nursery Milk: Government Response” has been placed in the Library. Copies are available to hon. Members from the Vote Office and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office.

Mental Health Act 1983 (Sections 135 and 136)

Jeremy Hunt: I am announcing the details of the joint review between the Department of Health and the Home Office of the operation of sections 135 and 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983. These provisions are aimed at giving support to a person experiencing a mental health crisis, by giving the police powers to temporarily remove people who appear to be suffering from a mental disorder, who need urgent care, to a “place of safety”, so that a mental health assessment can be carried out and appropriate arrangements made.
	The review will consider whether the primary legislation supports our overarching objective for all public services to respond to the needs of people experiencing mental health crises at the right time, and improving the outcomes for people experiencing mental health crises when they come into contact with the police. The review formally starts today and a briefing paper setting out the aims and time scales has been placed in the Library. Copies are available to hon. Members from the Vote Office, and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office.
	Work on this issue was initiated by the Home Office, since when the Home Secretary and I; the Minister with responsibility for care and support, my hon. Friend the Member for North Norfolk (Norman Lamb) and the Minister for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims have been working together to find the right way forward. We know there is a lot of interest about the way that sections 135 and 136 of the Act operate in practice, and the impacts both on the person detained, and on the use of police and health services’ time and resources. In particular, police officers can be called upon to make decisions on how to help someone experiencing a mental health crisis, when they may not be the best people to do so. We want to look at the evidence and to make sure that this part of the legislation is fit for purpose, clear, and workable.
	The review will bring together evidence and cover a range of options, which may include leaving the legislation as it is and making changes to the associated codes of practice, or proposing amendments to the legislation. We will be engaging widely on developing the options with practitioners as well as those affected by the legislation. We will also seek the views of interested hon. Members, including the all-party parliamentary group who recently led a debate on the matter. I welcome the current Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry into policing and mental health, which will explore the relevant evidence.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Domestic Violence and Abuse

Theresa May: Today, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has published the findings from its inspection of the police response to domestic violence and abuse. Domestic abuse is a truly appalling crime and I commissioned the HMIC inspection in September 2013 because I was concerned that the police response was not as good as it should be. HMIC has
	conducted a rigorous review and today’s report has exposed significant shortcomings in the police response to domestic abuse.
	The report highlights that the current police response to domestic abuse is failing victims. There is a lack of visible leadership and direction set by senior officers. Poor management and supervision fails to reinforce the right behaviours, attitudes and actions of officers, and the report shows that officers lack the skills and knowledge necessary to engage confidently and competently with victims of domestic abuse. Alarmingly, the report also identifies unacceptable weaknesses in some core policing activity, including the collection of evidence by officers at the scene of domestic abuse incidents.
	In line with the Government’s aim to end violence against women and girls, I will lead immediate action to ensure HMIC’s findings are addressed.
	This Government are committed to tackling domestic violence and abuse and to delivering a better response for the victims of these appalling crimes. We have ring-fenced £40 million for victims’ services; piloted and rolled out Clare’s law and domestic violence protection orders; extended the definition of domestic abuse to cover controlling behaviour and teenage relationships; run two successful campaigns to challenge perceptions of abuse; and placed domestic homicide reviews on a statutory footing to make sure lessons are learnt from individual tragedies.
	The police now must take urgent action. The HMIC report shows that there needs to be a fundamental change in police culture. I have written today to chief constables and police force leads on domestic abuse, making it clear my expectation that, in line with HMIC’s recommendations, every police force will have an action plan in place by September to improve their response to domestic violence and abuse. I will also establish a national oversight group, which I will chair, to ensure progress is made against each of HMIC’s recommendations. I am already leading work to implement all the actions for the Home Office, including improving data standards, reviewing the domestic homicide review process, and sharing best practice on tackling perpetrators.
	This Government have initiated a significant reform programme to professionalise policing, which has included establishing the College of Policing. I expect all chief constables and the college to prioritise the recommendations arising from this report. I will be overseeing their improvements on domestic violence and abuse through the national oversight group, and will report to Parliament again later in the year to update on progress.
	I have placed a copy of HMIC’s report on domestic violence and abuse in the House Library.

Taser Statistics

Damian Green: I am today publishing the statistics on police use of taser in England and Wales for six monthly periods between January 2012 and December 2013. These show that:
	Total police use of taser has increased from 2012 to 2013, continuing the trend seen since 2009.
	The proportion of taser where the “highest use” was “fired” decreased between 2012 and 2013—accounting for 17% of uses in 2013.
	The most common “highest use” of a taser was “red dot” in each of the last two years, accounting for just over half of all uses.
	Full details are available from:
	https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-use-of-taser-statistics-england-and-wales-2012-to-2013 and a copy will be placed in the Library of the House.

Firearms (England and Wales)

Damian Green: I am today publishing statistics on police use of firearms in England and Wales for the period 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013. These show that:
	The number of police operations in which firearms were authorised was 10,996—a decrease of 1,554 (14.1 %) on the previous year.
	The number of authorised firearms officers (AFO’s) was 6,091—a decrease of 665 (10.9%) officers overall on the previous year.
	The number of operations involving armed response vehicles was 13,116—a decrease of 1,145 (8.7%) on the previous year.
	The police discharged a conventional firearm in three incidents—down from 5 incidents in 2011-12.
	Full details are set out in the following tables.
	
		
			 Table 1: Number of Operations in which Firearms were Authorised 
			  2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 311 333 247 285 328 339 267 250 193 239 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 442 475 575 663 1,217 1,229 869 1,047 783 428 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 104 241 201 207 316 460 490 402 347 352 
			 CHESHIRE 397 358 367 340 317 269 314 244 226 175 
			 CLEVELAND 453 530 657 293 577 667 430 581 489 208 
			 CITY OF LONDON 364 404 323 239 365 63 38 64 64 52 
			 CUMBRIA 72 152 112 92 92 86 80 109 67 93 
			 DERBYSHIRE 369 287 305 223 211 310 198 179 190 204 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 112 71 84 80 143 170 185 189 163 151 
			 DORSET 231 223 263 354 258 369 351 242 194 188 
			 DURHAM 156 144 291 340 206 181 140 205 202 201 
			 ESSEX 275 296 432 245 529 529 444 384 402 584 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 127 176 229 280 162 132 175 133 160 21 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 507 461 478 481 497 524 415 360 414 472 
			 HAMPSHIRE 208 237 289 352 382 362 292 360 487 291 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 195 185 187 280 303 343 205 334 247 47 
			 HUMBERSIDE 183 206 362 235 209 123 133 166 99 85 
			 KENT 207 163 219 170 202 280 275 213 168 222 
			 LANCASHIRE 318 241 240 410 388 281 245 169 113 93 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 295 260 363 334 318 347 280 196 217 209 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 386 294 220 157 158 133 73 97 134 84 
			 MERSEYSIDE 751 733 669 727 829 556 701 663 708 754 
			 METROPOLITAN1 3,563 2,964 4,711 3,878 4,948 2,029 1,971 1,661 1,303 1,136 
			 NORFOLK 178 195 175 153 174 274 192 252 219 133 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 148 158 137 156 159 120 109 129 182 159 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 1,140 977 611 332 229 154 156 167 150 204 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 147 185 183 282 329 289 272 228 280 283 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 459 408 394 289 270 245 194 279 303 276 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 484 546 749 737 628 538 533 434 384 362 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 255 216 171 250 244 209 183 231 201 160 
			 SUFFOLK 251 153 202 256 193 237 225 227 280 227 
			 SURREY 203 151 222 222 375 479 188 162 141 180 
			 SUSSEX 280 187 190 201 331 331 227 205 247 180 
			 THAMES VALLEY 195 289 427 264 293 344 319 257 326 295 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 164 124 180 162 150 145 129 93 101 72 
			 WEST MERCIA 197 162 122 155 202 171 122 98 114 136 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 1,377 1,264 1,044 1,557 1,063 1,109 933 750 641 791 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE2 575 853 1,335 1,245 831 887 737 641 450 437 
			 WILTSHIRE 63 88 139 226 128 158 152 86 87 91 
			 DYFED POWYS 28 51 63 72 155 92 71 91 292 109 
			 GWENT 40 81 94 133 334 152 151 139 197 133 
		
	
	
		
			 NORTH WALES 197 223 350 340 259 185 126 182 186 113 
			 SOUTH WALES3 250 236 279 308 293 555 628 597 399 366 
			 TOTAL 16,657 15,981 18,891 18,005 19,595 16,456 14,218 13,496 12,550 10,996 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 2: Number of Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) 
			  2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 122 118 117 103 123 127 124 129 120 110 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 58 56 59 57 53 50 54 55 55 61 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 60 60 50 46 49 51 45 46 49 37 
			 CHESHIRE 75 76 73 80 72 88 95 87 80 68 
			 CLEVELAND 95 100 100 105 97 83 72 74 64 62 
			 CITY OF LONDON 86 89 86 45 49 50 51 53 52 45 
			 CUMBRIA 89 90 89 90 97 86 91 92 91 87 
			 DERBYSHIRE 70 74 75 69 61 61 71 65 60 61 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 132 123 122 132 142 146 157 146 147 138 
			 DORSET 60 64 62 67 71 79 65 62 58 53 
			 DURHAM 97 103 100 102 89 82 81 70 67 65 
			 ESSEX 186 202 205 220 225 223 223 207 202 198 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 82 93 92 94 95 97 108 102 97 87 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 205 187 245 217 250 296 237 227 236 227 
			 HAMPSHIRE 94 92 97 83 85 93 96 87 92 80 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 50 53 52 49 53 50 46 47 45 39 
			 HUMBERSIDE 96 101 92 83 87 80 77 72 77 68 
			 KENT 90 94 94 98 87 110 103 97 101 94 
			 LANCASHIRE 122 115 123 103 143 105 94 92 95 91 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 51 53 59 67 64 73 76 71 78 68 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 78 86 87 75 77 69 60 71 62 61 
			 MERSEYSIDE 94 93 129 139 153 154 141 127 122 120 
			 METROPOLITAN 2,060 2,134 2,331 2,584 2,530 2,740 2,856 2,665 2,731 2,314 
			 NORFOLK 114 125 119 127 114 106 111 112 125 104 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 52 50 56 59 53 50 55 50 55 48 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 90 93 98 92 96 95 102 96 95 98 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 60 56 78 67 67 63 64 72 77 70 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 138 138 149 146 137 133 91 98 92 81 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 98 122 116 118 106 99 102 86 98 93 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 67 76 70 82 82 75 85 81 88 80 
			 SUFFOLK 96 88 84 78 74 67 68 79 67 59 
			 SURREY 53 49 51 45 54 54 60 56 54 50 
			 SUSSEX 134 130 129 129 123 123 114 129 129 126 
			 THAMES VALLEY 172 176 180 186 180 180 193 194 199 194 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 46 53 55 59 63 66 76 60 62 42 
			 WEST MERCIA 139 141 152 133 163 137 115 132 134 127 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 124 134 145 175 177 165 180 167 156 158 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE 140 130 150 148 147 135 156 140 156 151 
			 WILTSHIRE 80 74 72 69 67 74 69 65 70 74 
			 DYFED POWYS 58 79 68 72 67 63 64 72 79 72 
			 GWENT 71 74 86 64 63 54 61 59 59 56 
			 NORTH WALES 73 65 57 56 57 53 76 57 80 72 
			 SOUTH WALES 139 134 130 115 138 121 114 104 100 102 
			 TOTAL 6,096 6,243 6,584 6,728 6,780 6,906 6,979 6,653 6,756 6,091 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 3: Number of Operations Involving Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs) 
			  2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 
			 AVON & SOMERSET 249 312 167 192 292 231 137 135 146 180 
			 BEDFORDSHIRE 414 419 534 639 1,171 1,188 819 991 739 383 
			 CAMBRIDGESHIRE 155 172 160 172 221 366 393 307 256 281 
		
	
	
		
			 CHESHIRE4 356 773 807 793 642 221  244 226 175 
			 CLEVELAND5 86 154 285 290 554 661 426 481  233 
			 CITY OF LONDON 364 275 234 183 200 63 32 63 64 51 
			 CUMBRIA 65 134 90 72 74 56 51 75 50 63 
			 DERBYSHIRE 312 254 257 183 187 252 169 141 152 168 
			 DEVON & CORNWALL 94 54 54 76 120 138 168 174 154 135 
			 DORSET 215 195 246 322 238 347 349 200 148 145 
			 DURHAM 96 91 256 204 192 164 140 204 193 192 
			 ESSEX 138 138 155 224 226 391 273 187 277 443 
			 GLOUCESTERSHIRE 109 121 145 213 147 120 100 78 104 115 
			 GTR MANCHESTER 440 364 306 214 196 460 292 288 290 323 
			 HAMPSHIRE 128 167 178 270 271 247 194 312 427 279 
			 HERTFORDSHIRE 157 155 160 226 262 311 182 286 206 167 
			 HUMBERSIDE 158 184 335 232 183 94 111 115 85 73 
			 KENT 193 124 183 373 364 325 227 203 134 189 
			 LANCASHIRE 273 228 232 383 313 279 239 166 109 76 
			 LEICESTERSHIRE 269 232 328 313 268 332 263 180 209 197 
			 LINCOLNSHIRE 355 276 210 147 153 128 63 89 124 76 
			 MERSEYSIDE 687 677 611 644 734 445 631 491 584 645 
			 METROPOLITAN6 2,423 2,322 2,572 2,770 2,303 7,374 7,295 6,009 4,696 4,289 
			 NORFOLK 169 163 149 133 165 252 176 217 183 95 
			 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 99 89 101 119 127 117 88 104 159 138 
			 NORTHUMBRIA 1,063 893 585 299 199 129 134 112 103 108 
			 NORTH YORKSHIRE 110 144 208 268 318 287 267 210 265 268 
			 NOTTINGHAMSHIRE 404 336 342 256 246 197 175 220 239 215 
			 SOUTH YORKSHIRE 322 438 632 522 493 387 325 307 259 308 
			 STAFFORDSHIRE 212 183 154 222 231 192 155 224 153 114 
			 SUFFOLK 194 119 149 204 148 206 189 166 207 161 
			 SURREY 190 140 204 209 380 469 174 155 137 161 
			 SUSSEX 250 163 162 165 311 248 177 175 108 148 
			 THAMES VALLEY 179 265 355 227 254 292 272 225 291 264 
			 WARWICKSHIRE 138 102 144 121 113 100 92 73 71 46 
			 WEST MERCIA 241 152 94 120 121 128 148 93 108 100 
			 WEST MIDLANDS 975 952 745 518 716 739 689 597 451 610 
			 WEST YORKSHIRE7 543 656 1,040 1,060 645 634 450 412 347 333 
			 WILTSHIRE 28 54 124 190 359 499 120 49 61 72 
			 DYFED POWYS 28 48 55 72 135 80 59 71 199 481 
			 GWENT 23 74 85 109 257 138 147 131 101 133 
			 NORTH WALES 153 180 299 295 221 156 107 165 166 97 
			 SOUTH WALES8 161 165 223 283 222 485 570 1,649 1,280 386 
			 TOTAL 13,218 13,137 14,355 14,527 14,972 19,928 17,068 16,774 14,261 13,116 
		
	
	
		
			 Table 4: Number of Incidents where Conventional Firearms were Discharged 
			  2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/119 2011/12 2012/13 
			 Number of INCIDENTS 4 5 9 3 7 5 6 4 5 3 
			 % OF INCIDENTS COMPARED WITH NUMBER OF AUTHORISED OPERATIONS 0.024 0.031 0.048 0.017 0.036 0.030 0.042 0.030 0.040 0.027 
		
	
	Source: Association of Chief Police Officers (Does not include discharges for animal destruction or during police training).
	Notes for tables:
	1. Revised figures supplied for 2008/09 to 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.
	2. Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011 /12 by West Yorkshire Police.
	3. Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 by South Wales Police.
	4. Cheshire did not record ARV operations for 2009/10.
	5. Cleveland did not record ARV operations for 2011/12.
	6. Revised figures supplied for 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.
	7. Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011/12 by West Yorkshire Police.
	8. Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 to 2011/12 by South Wales Police.
	9. Revised firearms discharge figure for 2010/11.
	Source: Home Office Public Order Unit, based on information aggregated from figures provided by individual police forces as part of the Home Office annual data requirement. This was followed by a further quality assurance process involving the Home Office asking individual forces to verify and sign off their figures.
	The information provided is a regular annual update of figures previously published and available on the Home Office website here:
	http://tna.europarchive.org/20100419081706/http:/www.police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operational-policing/firearms/index.html.
	Home Office guidance to forces for providing these figures is contained within the booklet “Annual Data Requirement, Police Personnel and Performance Data, Notes for Guidance”. For the purpose of this statistical return AFOs are deemed to be deployed when “they are required to conduct a specific task during which their possession of a firearm (with appropriate authorisation) is a required element” (Chapter 3, paragraph 3.1 “ACPO Manual of Guidance on Police Use of Firearms”).
	In addition to the total number of operations, a further sub-category is required regarding those operations where the initial or sole response is by armed response vehicle (ARV).
	Each incident will be classed as only one operation regardless of the number of personnel/deployments or tactics employed to deal with the incident.
	Deployments also include those incidents where AFOs “self-authorise”.
	The number of officers authorised to use firearms is at 31 March 2013.

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures

Theresa May: Section 19(1) of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (the Act) requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of every relevant three-month period on the exercise of her TPIM powers under the Act during that period.
	The level of information provided will always be subject to slight variations based on operational advice.
	
		
			 TPIM notices in force (as of 28 February 2014) 0 
			 TPIM notices in respect of British citizens (as of 28 February 2014) 0 
			 TPIM notices extended (during the reporting period) 0 
			 TPIM notices revoked (during the reporting period) 1 
			 TPIM notices revived (during the reporting period) 0 
			 Variations made to measures specified in TPIM notices (during the reporting period) 0 
		
	
	
		
			 Applications to vary measures specified in TPIM notices refused (during the reporting period) 0 
		
	
	As Parliament is aware, one individual subject to a TPIM notice (Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed) absconded on 1 November. The TPIM notice against him was revoked during this reporting period.
	Section 16 of the Act provides rights of appeal in relation to decisions taken by the Secretary of State under the Act. No appeals were lodged under section 16 during the reporting period. No judgments were handed down by the High Court in relation to appeals under section 16 of the Act.
	The TPIM review group (TRG) keeps every TPIM notice under regular and formal review. The TRG has convened once during this reporting period.

JUSTICE

Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information (Triennial Review)

Simon Hughes: I am today announcing the triennial review of the Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information (APPSI), an advisory non-departmental public body (NDPB).
	Triennial reviews of non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) are part of the Government’s commitment to ensuring, and improving, the accountability and effectiveness of public bodies.
	The Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information (APPSI) is an advisory NDPB of the Ministry of Justice whose remit applies to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Its role is to:
	review and consider complaints under the reuse of public sector information regulations 2005 (SI 2005 No. 1515) and advise on the impact of the complaints procedures under those regulations;
	advise Ministers on how to encourage and create opportunities in the information industry for greater reuse of public sector information; and
	advise The National Archives and Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office—an official within The National Archives—about changes and opportunities in the information industry, so that the licensing of Crown copyright and public sector information is aligned with current and emerging developments.
	The review will be conducted in accordance with Government guidance for reviewing NDPBs, and will focus on the core questions of effectiveness and good governance. It will be carried out in an open and transparent way, and interested stakeholders will be given the opportunity to contribute their views.
	I shall announce the findings of the review in due course.

Balance of Competences (Review)

Chris Grayling: I wish to inform both Houses that, further to the Foreign Secretary’s oral statement launching the review of the balance of competences in July 2012 and the written statements on the progress of the review in October 2012 and May 2013 the Ministry of Justice is launching its call for evidence in the area of information rights.
	The report will cover the European Union’s action in the area of information rights. It will focus on the specific information rights expressed by the treaties and cover two key areas: the protection of personal data, and access by individuals to public information.
	The call for evidence period will last at least 12 weeks. The Ministry of Justice will draw together the evidence and policy analysis into a first draft, which will go through a process of scrutiny before publication, which is due to take place at the end of 2014.
	The Ministry of Justice will take a rigorous approach to the collection and analysis of evidence. The call for evidence sets out the scope of the report and includes a series of broad questions on which contributors are asked to focus. Interested parties are invited to provide evidence in relation to the impact or effect of the competence in their area of expertise. The evidence received (subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act) will be published alongside the final report and will be available through the balance of competences review webpages on gov.uk.
	The Department will pursue an active engagement process, consulting widely across Parliament and its relevant committees, business, civil society, the devolved Administrations and legal practitioners. Our EU partners and the EU institutions will also be invited to contribute evidence to the review. As the review is to be objective and evidence based, we will encourage the broadest possible range of interested parties to contribute.
	The report will be a comprehensive, thorough and detailed analysis of EU action in this area that will aid our understanding of the nature of our EU membership; it will provide a constructive and serious contribution to the wider European debate about modernising, reforming and improving the EU. The report will not, however, produce specific policy recommendations.
	I am placing this document and the call for evidence in the Libraries of both Houses. The call for evidence will also be available through the balance of competences review pages on gov.uk

Judicial Appointments Commission (Triennial Review)

Chris Grayling: In March 2011 the Government responded to the Public Accounts Select Committee report “Smaller Government: Shrinking the Quango state” setting out the coalition’s plans for reforming the public bodies sector. It includes the requirement to undertake triennial reviews of Executive and advisory non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs).
	The Judicial Appointments Commission is an independent commission that selects candidates for judicial office in courts and tribunals in England and Wales, and for some tribunals whose jurisdiction extends to Scotland or Northern Ireland. It was established on 3 April 2006 as one of the major changes brought about by the Constitutional Reform Act (CRA) 2005, which also reformed the office of Lord Chancellor and established the Lord Chief Justice as head of the judiciary of England and Wales.
	To deliver the coalition Government’s commitment to transparency and accountability across our public bodies, the Judicial Appointments Commission will be
	subject to a triennial review. The Ministry of Justice, as the sponsoring Department, has today launched a consultation, which will last until 30 April 2014, inviting views. In line with Cabinet Office guidance, the review will consider the following:
	the continuing need for the Judicial Appointments Commission—both its functions and its form; and
	where it is agreed that it should remain, to review the control and governance arrangements in place to ensure that the public body is complying with recognised principles of good corporate governance.
	In conducting the triennial review, officials will be engaging with a broad range of Judicial Appointments Commission stakeholders, including the Lord Chief Justice and the judiciary. The review will be aligned with guidance published by the Cabinet Office: “Guidance on Reviews of Non Departmental Public Bodies”. The final report and findings will be laid in this House.

Female Offenders

Simon Hughes: As promised during Parliamentary passage of the Courts and Crime Act 2013, I am today publishing an update on the progress that has been made in delivering the Government’s strategic objectives for female offenders, which we published a year ago. These set out our intention to make sure that:
	there are robust and effective sentencing options in the community;
	services in the community address the specific needs of female offenders, where these differ from those of male offenders;
	the women’s custodial estate is tailored to their needs; and
	the transforming rehabilitation reforms support better life management to reduce women’s reoffending.
	In the last year we have established a Minister-led advisory board on female offenders which brings together key stakeholders, criminal justice partners and senior officials across Government to provide expert support and challenge as we deliver our strategic objectives for female offenders. The board met formally four times last year and also held workshops with a focus on the women’s custodial estate reconfiguration and guidance for future service providers under our transforming rehabilitation reforms.
	In October 2013, we published our response to the Justice Select Committee report, “Women Offenders: After the Corston Report” together with a review of the women’s custodial estate and a stocktake of community services available for female offenders.
	Following the women’s custodial estate review, we have established a new dedicated team to oversee the care and supervision of a small number of women with complex needs in custody which aims to guarantee that these women benefit from the most appropriate interventions and regimes available for their particular needs.
	In addition, we have put in place safeguards to make sure that the gender-specific needs of women are provided for as part of the transforming rehabilitation reforms. This included an amendment to the now Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 to make sure that contracts with future providers under transforming rehabilitation
	identify specific provision to meet the particular needs of female offenders. We have made available guidance to steer providers so that they understand the gender-specific needs of women. We have written into contracts that providers should give female offenders the option, where practicable, of a female-only interview space, female-only supervisors and not to be the only woman in an all male unpaid work group or attendance centre group.
	In addition, I am pleased to announce today that, in partnership with the Clink Charity, we are going to expand the employment opportunities which we provide to female offenders. Subject to planning permission, we will open a restaurant at HMP/YOI Styal. Here, offenders will be employed to prepare and serve the food while working towards accreditation which is recognised in the industry. The restaurant will be run by the Clink Charity, which has successful restaurants already established in the men’s estate—at HMPs High Down, Cardiff and Brixton. A disused chapel has been identified as a suitable building for the restaurant within the grounds of HMP/YOI Styal and we are looking forward to opening the doors of the restaurant to the public in spring 2015. The Clink Charity and HMP Send are also developing a horticultural training project where the female prisoners will be growing speciality vegetables and salad. Starting in May 2014, the project will employ 20 women who will be trained to gain their NVQ City and Guilds qualifications in horticulture. The produce will be used within the Clink restaurants at HMP High Down and HMP Brixton.
	Over coming months, we will continue to look at how we can create a better resettlement system for female prisoners which will help all those who want to do so, to serve their sentence as close as possible to where they will live on release which will increase opportunities to establish resettlement links with their local communities. With criminal justice partners in Greater Manchester we will continue to develop a new approach to female offenders in the criminal justice system which will refer women into community services at the earliest opportunity. We believe this model of working with female offenders can be extended to other parts of the country and we are supporting colleagues in Wales in developing a version of this work. To support this we will also continue to spread awareness of the gender specific needs of female offenders among criminal justice partners, including the development of a DVD in conjunction with the advisory board for circulation amongst police, judiciary and other front-line practitioners within the criminal justice system.
	In the year ahead, we will continue to deliver our strategic objectives through the transforming rehabilitation programme. We will establish, throughout England and Wales, sustainable rehabilitation services appropriate for women in the community. We will also deliver changes to the custodial estate and, in particular, develop new open accommodation units at HM/YOIs Drake Hall and Styal and improve employment opportunities for female offenders across the estate.
	We will improve opportunities for female prisoners to maintain important links with their families. We will continue to explore ways in which local police, courts and community services can work together to reduce the need for custodial solutions for female offenders. We will work with other Government Departments to make sure that more women find suitable housing at the
	time of their release. We will also work to understand better the drivers and solutions for women at risk of offending, including in particular those who engage in acquisitive crime and who may be under serious financial strain.
	The full update can be found at: Advisory Board on Female Offenders—Policy advisory groups—gov.uk and copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

TRANSPORT

Executive Agencies

Stephen Hammond: I am pleased to announce the publication of the 2014-15 business plans for all of the Department for Transport’s Executive agencies—the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), the Vehicle Certification Agency (VGA), the Highways Agency (HA) and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA).
	The business plans set out:
	the services each agency will deliver and any significant changes they plan to make;
	the resources they require; and,
	the key performance indicators (KPIs) by which their performance will be assessed.
	These plans allow service users and members of the public to assess how the agencies are performing in operating their key services, managing reforms and the agency finances.
	The business plans will be available electronically on gov.uk and copies will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses in due course.

Drug Driving

Robert Goodwill: In May 2012 the Government introduced primary legislation to Parliament that would create a new offence of driving with a specified controlled drug in the body above the specified limit for that drug. The Crime and Courts Act 2013 inserted a new section 5A in the Road Traffic Act 1988 and sets out the framework for the new offence.
	Regulations now need to be made to specify the drugs to be included in the legislation and the limits to be specified. I have today published the summary of responses to the two consultations which sought views on these regulations.
	The summary concludes that overall there is support for the Government’s proposed approach and I intend to lay regulations in Parliament on this basis.
	However, the Government have also concluded that there are significant concerns on the proposed limit for amphetamine. I have therefore asked my officials to reconsider the limit for this drug, with a view to consulting again later in the year and including the new limit in further regulations at a subsequent date.
	By taking this approach to the new offence our roads will be safer by making it easier for the police to tackle those who drive after taking illegal drugs and clarifying the position for those who take medication.
	Copies of the summary of responses will be laid in the Libraries of both Houses.

Extension of Crossrail

Stephen Hammond: I am pleased to inform the House that following agreement with the Mayor of London, my co-sponsor on the Crossrail project, it is now intended that Crossrail services will be extended to serve Reading from 2019. This marks a change in Crossrail’s western terminus, which was previously Maidenhead.
	My Department has worked closely with Transport for London, Crossrail Ltd and Network Rail to determine the best use of capacity on the Great Western line. This work has considered how to maximise capacity on the route while ensuring Crossrail services can operate efficiently enabling the best possible overall mix of passenger and freight services on this highly congested part of the national rail network.
	The decision to extend Crossrail services to Reading will achieve this while also offering greater flexibility for future timetabled services. Once Crossrail services begin across the whole line in 2019, passengers travelling to London from Reading and the other Thames valley stations will be able to travel to more destinations across London without the need to change at Paddington.
	Once operational, Crossrail services are expected to serve Maidenhead on a four trains per hour basis as originally planned, with two of these services continuing to Reading via Twyford.
	In addition, the planned future Great Western franchise service pattern from Reading to London will not change. Twice hourly semi-fast services and existing fast mainline services will continue, calling at the same stations as today.
	Passengers will continue to benefit from the service frequency enjoyed today between Reading and Hayes and Harlington, maintaining connectivity with Heathrow and to Ealing Broadway, for interchanges with the Central and District lines.
	The Reading extension will also generate some cost savings from reduced infrastructure enhancements at Maidenhead and Slough, and only minor works will be required at Twyford and Reading to accommodate Crossrail services.
	When fully operational, Crossrail will boost London’s rail-based capacity by 10%, connecting Reading and Heathrow in the west and Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east, through 21 km of newly built twin tunnels under central London. Transport for London will run Crossrail as part of its integrated transport services.

Northern Direct Award

Stephen Hammond: Today I have announced the successful conclusion of negotiations for a new directly awarded franchise agreement with Northern Rail Ltd. Northern Rail will continue to run passenger rail services on the Northern franchise for a period of 22 months, from the
	end of the current franchise on 1 April, to the start of services on the new competed franchise, expected in February 2016.
	The five passenger transport Executives in the region are cosignatories to this agreement and are continuing to work in partnership with Government on the management of services and the specification for the new franchise.
	The Northern franchise serves some of the country’s biggest cities including Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Sheffield. The new agreement sets challenging new targets for passenger satisfaction, punctuality and reliability, which will see continued improvement in the services provided to passengers, at reduced cost to the taxpayer.
	This award is a key step in securing the benefits to passengers from the north of England investment programme, which will see substantial Government investment over the next five years. This programme includes the electrification of a large part of the network, which will allow for cleaner, quicker and more reliable journeys for passengers.

Traffic Commissioners (Triennial Review)

Stephen Hammond: I am today announcing the start of a review of the traffic commissioners. Triennial reviews are part of the Government’s commitment to ensuring that non-departmental public bodies continue to have regular independent challenge, including to their objectives and governance.
	In the case of the traffic commissioners, the review will also contribute to delivering the Government’s response, published last October to the Transport Select Committee’s inquiry into the work of the Vehicle and Operating Standards Agency—which has since become part of the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency. I have sought and considered stakeholder views about the review’s coverage.
	This is planned to be an in-depth review of the traffic commissioners, involving an independent consultant. I will inform the House of the outcome of the review when it is completed.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Atos

Michael Penning: The previous Government appointed Atos the sole provider for carrying out work capability assessments in 2008. Since this Government inherited the contract to deliver the work capability assessment, we have been committed to a process of continuous improvement.
	When this Government took over responsibility for the work capability assessment we were concerned about the nature of the contract and the process we inherited from the previous Government. We immediately identified the need for considerable improvements and we undertook a series of reviews to improve the balance. When I took over responsibility, I decided to build on the work identified by my predecessors who engaged Professor Harrington, a respected occupational physician, to
	undertake the initial independent review. We have taken forward the recommendations from the three Harrington reviews and these have significantly improved the assessment. Today I am pleased to announce we are publishing our response to the first review by his successor Doctor Litchfield.
	My commitment to performance is why my Department took immediate action last summer when we identified significant quality failures in the written reports produced by Atos following assessments.
	Today I am announcing that following detailed negotiations with Atos, the Government have reached a settlement for Atos to exit the contract to deliver work capability assessments before it is due to end in August 2015.
	I am pleased to confirm that Atos will not receive a single penny of compensation from the taxpayer for the early termination of their contract. Quite the contrary, I can also confirm that Atos has made a substantial financial settlement to the Department for Work and Pensions.
	It is important to outline that we have learnt from the mistakes of the last contract agreed by the previous Government. We have negotiated an agreement covering the remaining term that is more robust, with an agreed performance regime that gives us confidence delivery goals will be achieved. It is that same commercial rigour that will underpin the new procurement for these services that I am announcing today.
	I will shortly be issuing a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union seeking a new provider to deliver health and disability assessments including work capability assessments. My Department will now withdraw the notice issued in the Official Journal of the European Union last September.
	To ensure protection for claimants and a smooth transition, I believe the most effective way to stabilise and then increase delivery is to bring in one national provider to deliver the work capability assessment, initially using elements of the Atos infrastructure. In the longer term, I am committed to moving to multiple providers to increase competition. My Department is committed to learning the lessons from these past failures and ensuring they are reflected in the design and management of future contracts, as well as the Department’s own commercial capability.
	The plan is for the new contract to be awarded later this year, with a view to the new provider taking responsibility for delivery of work capability assessments by 2015. It is expected that the transfer of undertakings protection of employment regulations will apply and most of the Atos employees will transfer to the new provider. The new provider should therefore be able to step into the contract without disrupting the service. My absolute priority for the new provider will be to deliver the best service possible for claimants, increase the volume of assessments carried out and reduce waiting times. In the meantime, we will focus on delivery of assessments for those making new claims and those who have changes in their condition.
	Atos is announcing today that the company will be withdrawing from delivery of work capability assessments in Great Britain (Atos will continue to deliver these assessments under its separate contract in Northern Ireland). Atos will continue to deliver personal independence payment assessments in two regions of Great Britain.
	Atos will continue to deliver work capability assessments until contract exit and will be subject to a rigorous quality and service credit regime. To that end, I am appointing a remedial advisory team to work with the Atos health care management during this period to assist Atos in meeting their contractual obligations, ahead of awarding the contract to a new provider. This is being accomplished with the full co-operation of Atos who will meet all related costs.
	There is strong evidence that work is good for physical and mental well-being, and that being out of work can contribute to poorer health and other negative outcomes. While we will always support people who genuinely cannot work, this Government are committed to getting as many people as possible into work. Notwithstanding the considerable improvements that we have had to make to the work capability assessment process we inherited, our reforms mean that over 650,000 people are now looking for, or preparing for, work. I am committed to ensuring that the assessments are fair and accurate and, together with robust contract management, the recommendations made by Dr Litchfield in his independent review will help us continue to improve the work capability assessment.

Work Capability Assessment

Michael Penning: The Government will be publishing today the response to the fourth independent review of the work capability assessment (WCA).
	Dr Paul Litchfield carried out the review, and I welcome his findings. In carrying out his review Dr Litchfield gathered a range of evidence to provide invaluable insight into how the WCA is working.
	I strongly support the principle of the work capability assessment and am committed to continuously improving the assessment process to ensure it is as fair and as accurate as possible—Dr Litchfield’s recommendations allow us to build on improvements already made to the assessment to achieve this aim.
	Government have accepted or accepted with certain caveats all but one of the 32 recommendations that fall within the scope of DWP. As a result of Dr Litchfield’s recommendations we will:
	Carry out a full impact assessment into the alternative approach of decision-maker triage outlined by Dr Litchfield;
	Continue work already begun with the British Medical Association (BMA) to develop and co-design a new ESA113 for the collection of further medical evidence; and
	Comprehensively review all letter and forms—including the ESA50 form—used in the WCA process.
	As announced on 6 March, Official Report, column 67WS, I am delighted that Dr Litchfield has agreed to lead the fifth and final independent review of the WCA and I look forward to receiving his findings before the end of 2014.
	Finally, the Government response to Dr Litchfield’s review also sets out what we will do as a result of the evidence-based review of the WCA descriptors.
	The evidence-based review did not provide evidence that changes to the WCA descriptors would significantly improve the overall assessment. However, the findings do indicate that it might be possible to make practical improvements to the assessment process.
	As such we intend to build on the experience of using a semi-structured interview topic guide during the evidence-based review and examine the possibility of health care
	professionals carrying out face-to-face assessments using prompts from a topic guide in WCA discussions with claimants generally.